TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 107
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Amended Memo has been filed which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant, learned counsel appearing for the 'Resolution Professional' as well as learned counsel appearing for the Successful Resolution Applicant. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the 'National Company Law Tribunal' (NCLT), New Delhi, Court-3 by which I.A. No. 3419/2021 filed by the Appellant has been rejected. CIRP of the Corporate Debtor (Dream Procon Pvt. Ltd.) commenced on 06.09.2019. The IRP invited the claims, the Resolution Professional after receiving the claims prepared list of Financial Creditor. List was also prepared of those Financial Creditor who have not filed claim till 17.06.2020 in which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Corporate Debtor duly reflected the unit for which the present belated claim has been field in the list of flats, but the appellant did not filed any claim, IA is devoid of any merit and rejected. Aggrieved by the order rejecting the claim, Appellant has come up in this appeal. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant challenging order submit that in view of the laid down in Puneet Kaur Vs. M/s K.V. Developers Private Limited Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 390 of 2022, the resolution applicant was obliged to consider the claim of the amount receipt form the appellant which was reflected in list prepared by the Resolution Professional. It is submitted that in the resolution plan there was provisions that all claims which have been filed shall be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on'ble Supreme Court judgment in Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association and others Vs. NBCC (India) Limited and others and submit that appellant has no right to file the appeal, she being only one homebuyers. It is submitted that the Resolution Plan has already been approved by Committee of Creditors and Adjudicating Authority has rightly rejected the application of the appellant. Heard Ld. Counsel for the parties. From the facts brought on record, it is clear that claim of the applicant's unit as well as the amount paid by applicant are reflected in the list prepared at page 146 of the Appeal Paper Book. "Who had not filed their claim" and the appellant is mentioned in Serial No.1. Ld. Counsel for the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll stand extinguished on the Effective Date." The judgement relied in the Rahul Jain Vs. Nilesh Sharma was case with regard to unit B-1901 of the same CIRP. This tribunal after hearing parties in paragraph 10,16 & 17 laid down following: "10. There is no dispute that the liability of the CD towards the Appellant is clearly reflected in the IM. The appellant has also filed the claim belatedly and the CoC has approved the plan but the plan has not been approved by the Adjudicating Authority so far as it is pending for its consideration. The appellant has basically relied upon a decision in the case of Puneet Kaur (Supra) in which this court has held that "in the preset case there is no denial that details of the Appellant(s) an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the Appellant had disbursed the amount in question to the CD whereas in the present there is no dispute that the Appellant had disbursed the amount after taking loan from the Bank and the said factum is part of the IM. 17. Thus, keeping in view the totality of circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the controversy in hand is covered by the case of Puneet Kaur (Supra) and therefore, while allowing the present appeal and setting aside the impugned order, we direct the RP to submit the detail of the appellant reflected in the record of the CD including their claim to the resolution applicant on the basis of which the resolution applicant shall prepare an addendum to the resolution plan which may be placed before the ....